Mich. Comp. Laws » Michigan Compiled Laws / Chapter 440 / Act 174 of 1962
Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 440.2714 (2026)

Accepted goods; buyer's damages for breach.

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE


Act 174 of 1962


440.2714 Accepted goods; buyer's damages for breach.

Sec. 2714.

    (1)  Where the buyer has accepted goods and given notification (subsection (3) of section 2607) he may recover as damages for any nonconformity of tender the loss resulting in the ordinary course of events from the seller's breach as determined in any manner which is reasonable.

    (2) The measure of damages for breach of warranty is the difference at the time and place of acceptance between the value of the goods accepted and the value they would have had if they had been as warranted, unless special circumstances show proximate damages of a different amount.

    (3) In a proper case any incidental and consequential damages under the next section may also be recovered.

History: 1962, Act 174, Eff. Jan. 1, 1964

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 33 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1968–2024 · leading case: Sullivan Indus., Inc. v. Double Seal Glass Co., 480 N.W.2d 623 (Mich. Ct. App. 1991).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Sullivan Indus., Inc. v. Double Seal Glass Co., 480 N.W.2d 623 (Mich. Ct. App. 1991). · cites it 3× “This statute provides in pertinent part: (2) The measure of damages for breach of warranty is the difference at the time and place of acceptance between the value of the goods accepted and the value they would have had if they had been as warranted, unless special circumstances…”
Neibarger v. Universal Coopertives, Inc., 486 N.W.2d 612 (Mich. 1992). · cites it 2× “MCL 440.2714; MSA 19.2714, MCL 440.2715; MSA 19.”
Eaton Corp. v. Magnavox Co., 581 F. Supp. 1514 (E.D. Mich. 1984). · cites it 4× “Under Mich.Comp.Laws Ann. § 440.2714, a buyer can recover damages for breach of warranty only if he has accepted the goods and given the notice required under Mich.”
S C Gray, Inc. v. Ford Motor Co., 286 N.W.2d 34 (Mich. Ct. App. 1979). · cites it 2× “MCL 440.2714; MSA 19.2714. There was no evidence of the actual value of the equipment at the time of acceptance, although it may well have had some value since there was testimony that the test stands could be easily converted to manual operation and used as backups if automatic…”
Golden v. Gorno Bros., Inc., 274 F. Supp. 2d 913 (E.D. Mich. 2003). · cites it 5× “Mich. Comp. Laws Ann. § 440.2714 (3). Plaintiff has made no such claim.”
Charles Farley v. Country Coach Inc., 403 F. App'x 973 (6th Cir. 2010). · cites it 3× “” Mich. Comp. Laws § 440.2714 (2). Country Coach argued that — although the court “could potentially determine” that Farley’s evidence of the purchase price “can be used as the price [of the RV] .”
Cady v. Dick Loehr’s, Inc, 299 N.W.2d 69 (Mich. Ct. App. 1980). · cites it 3× “2 MCL 440.2714, 440.2715; MSA 19.2714, 19.2715.”
Johnson v. Mobil Oil Corp., 415 F. Supp. 264 (E.D. Mich. 1976). “§ 440.2714(2): The measure of damages for breach of warranty is the difference at the time and place of acceptance between the value of the goods accepted and the value they would have had if they had been as warranted, unless special circumstances show proximate damages of a…”
Alofs Mfg. Co. v. Toyota Mfg., Kentucky, Inc. (In Re Alofs Mfg. Co.), 209 B.R. 83 (Bankr. W.D. Mich. 1997). · cites it 2× “See generally Mich. Comp. Laws Ann. § 440.2714 (“Accepted goods; buyer's damages for breach").”
Horizon Lawn Maint., Inc. v. Columbus-Kenworth, Inc., 188 F. Supp. 3d 631 (E.D. Mich. 2016). · cites it 2× “the Code, including revocation of acceptance under Mich. Comp. Laws § 440.2608 (Count I); breach of warranty under Mich.”
Mallory v. Conida Warehouses, Inc, 350 N.W.2d 825 (Mich. Ct. App. 1984). · cites it 2× “MCL 440.2714, 440.2715; MSA 19.2714, 19.2715.”
Kelynack v. Yamaha Motor Corp., 394 N.W.2d 17 (Mich. Ct. App. 1986). “Defendant Yamaha Motor Corporation, usa, appeals as of right the decision of a Macomb Circuit Court judge granting plaintiff damages for breach of warranty, plus attorney fees pursuant to MCL 440.2714, 440.2715; MSA 19.2714, 19.2715.”
Show all 33 citing cases →
Mich. Comp. Laws § 440.2714(1): 3 cases
Kirby v. Chrysler Corp., 554 F. Supp. 743 (D. Md. 1982).
Conifer Holdings Inc v. Innovative Network Solutions Inc (Mich. Ct. App. 2023).
Maeder Bros Quality Wood Pellets Inc v. Hammond Drives & Equip. (Mich. Ct. App. 2015).
Mich. Comp. Laws § 440.2714(2): 8 cases
Johnson v. Mobil Oil Corp., 415 F. Supp. 264 (E.D. Mich. 1976). “§ 440.2714(2): The measure of damages for breach of warranty is the difference at the time and place of acceptance between the value of the goods accepted and the value they would have had if they had been as warranted, unless special circumstances show proximate damages of a…”
S C Gray, Inc. v. Ford Motor Co., 286 N.W.2d 34 (Mich. Ct. App. 1979). “MCL 440.2714; MSA 19.2714. There was no evidence of the actual value of the equipment at the time of acceptance, although it may well have had some value since there was testimony that the test stands could be easily converted to manual operation and used as backups if automatic…”
Leavitt v. Monaco Coach Corp., 616 N.W.2d 175 (Mich. Ct. App. 2000).
Golden v. Gorno Bros., Inc., 274 F. Supp. 2d 913 (E.D. Mich. 2003). “Mich. Comp. Laws Ann. § 440.2714 (3). Plaintiff has made no such claim.”
Davis v. Forest River, Inc., 774 N.W.2d 327 (Mich. 2009).
Mich. Comp. Laws § 440.2714(3): 3 cases
Cady v. Dick Loehr’s, Inc, 299 N.W.2d 69 (Mich. Ct. App. 1980). “2 MCL 440.2714, 440.2715; MSA 19.2714, 19.2715.”
Martel v. Duffy-Mott Corp., 166 N.W.2d 541 (Mich. Ct. App. 1968).
Hensley v. Colonial Dodge, Inc., 245 N.W.2d 142 (Mich. Ct. App. 1976).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.